Would you please help us put an ad in the New York Times, Washington Post (or maybe also Ha’aretz and Yediot in Israel, and other media, depending on how much money we can raise) to put public pressure on President Obama to NOT agree to overtly or covertly approve an Israeli preemptive strike on sites where Iran is developing its nuclear capacities?

As of now, Iran does not have those capacities, and though Israeli leaders are arguing that they must strike now before it becomes impossible to block the development of nuclear weapons, U.S. intelligence sources said on Friday, Feb. 24th, that Iran had not made any decision to go forward with developing nuclear weapons. You can view a sample version of the ad below(though when it is layed out beautifully on a full page in the NY Times and Washington Post, it will not look as wordy as it looks now, and there will be room for the names of some who have signed and donated to it). These ads are expensive, but they’ve been effective for the political Right and we need to help make more visible the peace-oriented majority of Americans who don’t support another war. We need to move quickly because high-level decisions on this are being made soon.

A “preemptive strike” on Iran could easily lead to a new war in which the U.S. felt it had to defend Israel from Iranian retaliations, or in which Iran attacked U.S. interests in retaliation (knowing that Israel would not go through with an attack unless it had gotten at least covert assurances from the Obama Administration that it would provide protection for Israel, even if publicly it denied ever giving such assurances). The pressure from AIPAC (at whose convention next week Obama, Netanyahu, and Gingrich have all agreed to speak, and don’t be surprised if they also invite Santorum), from Christian Zionists, and from the Republican party to give Israel blanket assurances for full backing could easily push Obama and the vast majority of Democrats in Congress toward protecting themselves against being called “weak and indecisive on national defense.” The way they might do that is to rally around an attack on Iran. Just as Congressional Democrats were unwilling to stand up against the Patriot Act, against the Bush-sponsored war in Iraq or the Obama escalation of the war in Afghanistan, so they may again capitulate to the call to “be tough.”

Demonstrators hold a sign that reads,

As much as we detest the oppressive and dictatorial regime of the mullahs in Iran, as much as we want it to be replaced by a democratic and human rights-respecting regime, we know that the only way that can happen is through an uprising of the people of Iran. An assault by Israel backed by the U.S. (overtly or covertly) will only strengthen the horrific gangsters who have misused the language of Islam to justify their oppressive regime, twisting the doctrines of Islam away from their fundamentally decent and peace-loving essence to manifest a hateful and repressive side. But we don’t believe this terrible regime can be overthrown by Israel or the U.S., and we do believe that a first strike or so-called “preemptive strike” is a violation of international law, a war crime, and is both immoral and self-destructive (because it will push Iranians of all stripes into having to support the reactionary mullahs who will be hailed as the embodiment of the nationalist efforts to survive foreign assaults). We hope someday to see those mullahs brought to trial before an international court of justice, along with the leaders of many other countries who have engaged in human rights violations, but another war, started by Israel or the U.S., will make this less rather than more likely. So lets stop this before it starts. And it could start very soon.

The hawks will be dominating the media in the next few weeks as Netanyahu arrives in the U.S., AIPAC has its national convention, and Republican candidates for the presidency will be attacking Democrats and Obama for being “too soft” or even charging them with being “pro the Iranian government”! We need you to donate to help us put an ad in the NY Times, Washington Post and other media (on-line places like Huffington Post and Salon and– you tell us) to oppose this possible attack on Iran and offset the appearance of the American people passively going along with the Right and the spineless as they lead us into yet another war. You probably could have written it better, but at this point if you agree with the bottom line of “No war and no attack on Iran” please, please sign it and donate to make it possible. There may be parts of it you disagree with, which is why each part says “some of us” so that you are not committed to agreeing with every part of it, but only to saying “No War and No Attack on Iran.”

This campaign will cost at least $100,000. We can only do it if you believe it’s worth it to you to donate more than you can affordto help us put pressure to not go along with this crazy plan. Imagine how much we would have saved as a society (many trillions of dollars that could have been used to help alleviate poverty, suffering, and fund medical research and housing and environmental advances) had we not gone to war with Iraq. Believe it or not, this is going to be a much worse war, and though Obama may think he is avoiding it, unless he uses his power to let Israel know that the US will stand publicly agaiinst the attack and refuse to get involved in a war with Iran, an attack on Iran has the potential of letting loose a war that will be far more likely to escalate wildly beyond US intentions once it is started.

So what we need from you is $1,000 or $500 or $300, and unless you tell us otherwise, we’ll list your name on the ad (space allowing) as one of several hundred signatories if you can give that much. And we’ll be happy to get whatever you can give, even if it’s only $25, though we may not have space in the ad to list all the donors who give less than $300 (though we will list your name online unless you ask us not to do so). We have to act quickly if we are going to be able to have the money to publish this ad before final decisions are made to strike Iran. So please go towww.tikkun.org/iran, where you can donate to make this ad possible.

I know you share with me a desire for a world of peace. Later we may need to be involved in demonstrations or even non-violent civil disobedience, but right now all you need to do is to sign and donate to the ad (and if you don’t want to have your name published, there’s an option you can click when signing so that your name will not be made public). So please give generously even if it financially hurts. We have to stand together for our belief in a world of peace, and the only path to peace is a path of peace. Our means must be consistent with our ends. Stand with me on this one, please!

14 Responses to “Help Tikkun Place a New York Times Ad Against Striking Iran”

I ams sure the good rabbi realizes that Iran did not allow the IAEA access to the suspected facilities. The good Rabbi should realize that Israel will do what it has to in order to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. I am sure the good Rabbi realizes that iran being a nuclear power also means that Hezbollah will have access to that technology as well.

Today, we know that Iran has announced that it has reached 20% refinement of uranium, well beyond what is need for civilian use. For the sake of world peace, i suggest that the good Rabbi turn to Iran and appeal to them to back-off form the nuclear weapons program. Israel has very legitimate concerns that appear to be beyond the good Rabbi’s understanding. We don’t need another Holocaust, one was enough.

Rabbi Lerner, the Middle East is not Planet Berkeley, and you can hardly understand the concerns of most Israelis who have listened to Iran’s thrusts for years.

Fear of the demonized Other. How many times has Rabbi Lerner said or written those words? How many more times will he have to say or write them before those who need to can hear and understand? I have heard and read the words of some who claim to speak for Israel, and others who speak for Iran, and they sound equally threatening. I have also heard and read the words of Israelis, and Iranians, each lovers of their own countries, and heard people who fear and reject war as the atrocity it is. It seems the more closely you listen to the people of a country, the less you hear the incessant drone of governments guided by “might makes right” thinking. Threats of the destruction of the Other are only fears masculinized, which inevitably lead to the objectification of civilian populaces (the cold blooded “collateral damage” of Iraq). How long will it take us to learn and internalize this lesson? How many more innocents will be made into historical statistics, before these words will find their true meaning: NEVER AGAIN. Those are powerful words, meant for ALL of us, not just the Other.

Attacking Iran would convert a potential catastrophe into an almost sure one, with a strong chance of the current fragile economic conditions turning into a worldwide depression as oil prices soar, and greatly increased violence, terrorism, and anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism, and possibly a major war.

It is essential that Iran realize that it would be devastated if it used a nuclear weapon.

While difficult to obtain, it is essential that a just, comprehensive, sustainable resolution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict be obtained and that Israel and the US lead in a Middle East and a global Marshall Plan, as suggested by Michael Lerner and the Network of Spiritual Progressives, to sharply reduce poverty, hunger, illiteracy, disease, pollution, and other societal ills. We must convince Iran that ishe would be safer and better off through cooperation and harmony than in striving for lethal weapons.

Richard, Iran is one of the primary barriers to peace. They are supporting Hezbollah and Hamas and time and time again have threatened Israel’s existence. I don’t know if they are in touch with reality to fear any consequences from attacking Israel.

You support a “Global Marshal Plan, when the world’s wealth has shifted into the oil producing countries. We do not see the rich Gulf countries considering a Marshal Plan for the less fortunate Arab counties. When will these states be pressed to meet their global obligations. When will they be called to join “a network of spiritual progressives”? You are overestimating the reach of the western world.

Reasoning with the Ayatollahs is no better than reasoning with Hitler.

please take the trouble to ask a trusted jewish, muslim or buddhist iranian who is anti-mullah and anti-ahmadinejad, to translate ahmadinejad’s utterances for you.
a man who claims jewish ancestry, calls for a referendum by all people now living between the jordan and the mediterranean, boasts of the jewish representation in the iranian parliament, that’s no hitler.
he never threatened to wipe israel off the map; he said “wouldn’t it be great if the regime now controlling jerusalem disappeared from the pages of history”. get it straight, then spout your disagreement with him and say you want a jewish palestine or a protestant usa.

Stalin had a token Jew in the Politburo. What is you damn point. Ahmadinijad had a Holocaust conference attended by deniers. What is your point? He has threatened to wipe out Israel. So unfortunate, we have delusion people posting here.

how many calories in a grapefruit juice, Hello! I just wanted to ask if you ever have any problems with hackers? My last blog (wordpress) was hacked and I ended up losing many months of hard work due to no back up. Do you have any methods to protect against hackers?

I loved as much as you’ll receive carried out right here. The sketch is tasteful, your authored subject matter stylish. nonetheless, you command get got an edginess over that you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come more formerly again as exactly the same nearly a lot often inside case you shield this increase.